29 Pa. D. & C.5th 244
Pennsylvania Court of Common P...2013Background
- August 23, 2011 order sealed the underlying record; press petitions to unseal were filed by PG Publishing and Observer Publishing, later granted intervention; an evidentiary hearing on January 18, 2013 produced no witnesses and defense/press argued purely on law; Superior Court remanded for merits ruling and liberal construction of 2327; hearing evolved into contested constitutional and common-law access issues; court reverses sealing on common-law openness and rejects a business-entity privacy right under Pennsylvania Constitution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether common-law presumption of openness requires unsealing | Press prevailed under PA ChildCare LLC | Defendants failed to show injury or need to seal | Common-law openness applies; order reversed |
| Whether a business-entity privacy right exists under Pennsylvania Constitution | Press rights override secrecy | Entities have privacy rights under Article I | No business-entity privacy right; entities are not protected by Article I, §§1,8 |
| Whether Edmunds factors support privacy concerns in unsealing | Press burden to show openness outweighs privacy | Defendants lack evidentiary support for privacy harms | Edmunds factors favor openness; no proven privacy harms |
| Who bears the burden of proof given prior sealing orders | Burden should rest on press to show good cause | Burden shifts to press once record sealed | Burden remains on party seeking access; press shown good cause |
Key Cases Cited
- PA ChildCare LLC v. Flood, 887 A.2d 309 (Pa. Super. 2005) (presumption of openness in public records and open access context)
- Commonwealth v. Edmunds, 586 A.2d 887 (Pa. 1991) (Edmunds factors for state-constitutional privacy analysis)
- In re Estate of duPont, 523 A.2d 579 (Pa. 2010) (burden of proving good cause for access when records previously sealed; distinctions from ChildCare)
- Roberts v. Gulf Oil Corp., 195 Cal. Rptr. 793 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983) (California right of privacy does not extend to corporations)
- Great Falls Tribune v. Montana Pub. Serv. Comm., 82 P.3d 876 (Mont. 2003) (Montana holds privacy right limited to individuals, not entities)
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) (privacy rights basis for penumbras (conceptual backdrop))